'Expelled'

It would be interesting to see what this film reveals. If no one has seen it, then one can't give a "logical and reasonable" critique of it yet. ID is not about science. And people who believe in God know that He is not about magic. I found a copy of The Descent of Man on my bookshelf last night. I didn't even know I had it. I've started to read it and some of Darwin's writing seems disjointed. I have to read more, but I also believe there is (not was) an evolutionary process on the earth and it is still going on. Besides history, a lot in the Bible is metaphor, or figurative. People of faith know how to interpret its message just as scientists know how to deduce their principles from hypotheses (which are guesses). If you don't believe that God is behind the creation of the universe, after which we know that life evolved on the planet Earth, so be it. I think it's just amazing that only the planet Earth has such life and varied species, and climates and changes of seasons, and evolution, and people who can form ideas etc. etc. Scientific proof depends on the physcial, but faith is metaphyscial. Neither one of them should be trashed.

Andy, there are thousands of legitimate ministries and you would defame them all because of the few that have been caught stealing money? That is not being very honest and it doesn't change the truth. Evolutionist have had decades to come up with some proof and they have nothing to show for all the money they have spent. They have proven nothing.

...and people!!! The Bible has described two different kinds of dinosaurs that have only relatively recently been discovered. The Bible has been describing these two dinosaurs that were created the same time as man written 5000 years ago!!! Evolution is a total disgrace!

Daleri, I don't recall using the word 'all.' Those to whom I refer know who they are. Such pious luminaries as Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, and their bretheren.

Deb
"Well-when I die, and my belief in God is false-then I will just be dead. If I am right, and athiests are wrong-then it will suck to be them!!!"

But what if the Hindoes were right? Or the ancient Norse? Or the Aztecs? Sucks to be you then

"Ben Stein, the TV personality, writer, actor, lawyer, economist, and speechwriter for Presidents Nixon and Ford"

In related news, a guy who's been a baker, architect and cardealer will talk about how modern medical science is wrong and evil for society

(I'm being sarcastic)

Andy, those con artists are long gone. There may still be a few more but they will be found out. The Bible says so. Still there are many ministries that even send food, drill water wells, take care of unwanted babies as much as the law allows etc.

The attacks on Andy are relevant to the issues presented here. Andy's words have been distorted by people who feel they have to defend what they believe at all costs.

Did Andy use the word "all" to put down every religious ministry? No. He did talk about "the rest of the religious hucksters who purport to take care of the poor." There *are* a great deal of religious hucksters, and while there are indeed thousands of legitimate ministries, even good Christian leaders acknowledge that these frauds hurt the testimony of all the rest. What is disturbing is that even after a "ministry" has been found to be corrupt, many of its adherents will continue to support it on the basis of faith or "God's will." This makes Christians look silly and stupid.

Daleri says that "Evolution is a total disgrace" without any real knowledge of what evolution is, how it is defined in science, and the rationale behind it. This is typical of many people of faith (not all of them, mind you!) who do not wish their viewpoints to be challenged by facts, but are willing without knowledge or evidence to tar other viewpoints and those who hold them as being completely evil.

But what people of faith do not understand is that if they wish to communicate their message of the Love of God, then such blind hatred of others is surely the wrong way to go about it. And blind support of those who lie in God's name is the wrong way to demonstrate the truthfulness of their position.

Science isn't perfect. We don't claim it to be. It is a methodical way of collecting information and correlating it into a coherent body of knowledge. It doesn't use "revelation" -- by its very nature it cannot. It has to follow the evidence. The very willingness of science to alter positions in any area where clear evidence indicates that it must is proof of its generally honest frame of mind. Scientists who lie about the evidence are routinely exposed and their work held up to intense scrutiny -- by other scientists! Those who perpetuate frauds don't last too long.

I suggest that Daleri and other creationists who wish to challenge those who support evolution to define their terms and talk about evolution honestly and without hysteria. Let them present their evidence (and where to find it!). Tell us what bothers them. Let them listen to coherent explanations and learn what the subject actually says - not what some preacher tells them it says! There are plenty of people who work in evolutionary fields that are believers!

To be quite honest, the creationist leaders have wound up driving a lot of people from the faith by their lies and dishonest tactics. Is it too much to think that being completely open and honest is the more appropriate way to do the work of the Lord?

jnnttlc

Well said, my sentiments as well. But I would like to remind you of our prior posts. "Descent of Man", while interesting from a historical viewpoint, is very dated. It is Darwin's original hypothesis, not accepted as the theory of evolution. Darwin was not aware of our true relationship to the other great apes but he put us on the right track. On the other hand, "Origin of Species" is the basis for the theory of evolution, and while it has many dating errors, is still a valid text. These books are a bit difficult to read because of Darwin's writing style but worth the effort.

Daleri, I'm assuming the columns you are talking about are something like the Greek columns that supported the Parthenon. This is entirely incorrect. Science has proven that islands, including Atolls, are formed volcanically. This is done by what are known as hot spots. These are weak areas in the main tectonic plate where magma, or lava, can get through. It bubbles up and erupts long enough to form an island. Science has seen this happen. Stating that islands are supported by columns, is just plain wrong.

As for the decades of work done by science and we've got nothing to show for it? Well thats wrong too. I'm guessing you mean evolutionary science, and not all sciences, because that would make you look like you live in a cave and a hypocrit at the same time because you are using a computer. Science has found numerous, countless millions of fossils supporting evolution. Yes there are gaps. But as stated before, not every dead animal gets fossilized or mummified. I do agree that evolution is a theory, but it is largely supported by many, many, many observations. ID or Creationism is not.

As for your dinosaur and human walking together theory. Can you give me a place in the Bible where it is stated? I'll go read it. Also, if humans and dinosaurs were indeed alive at the same time, why hasn't any human remains been found in the same geologic strata as dinosaurs? Or any mammal bigger than a dog for that matter? Thats because we weren't alive during that time. If we were, we'd have record of it, with fossils, and we'd have some sort of written record of it, in multiple locations around the world in cave paintings and perhaps even some written on stone tablets.

Deb
A Theory is more than a Hypothesis and less than a Law. The Law is "etched in stone", the Hypothesis is unproven, the Theory is a proven hypothesis but not "etched in stone", ie. the theory is an evolving concept that has valid proofs.
Hope that helps.

Thanks for the defense, guys, but my only gripe is with those who spout the bible as absolute proof, yet chide the evolutionists for "spouting evolution as dogma." That's hypocrisy of the first water.
Sticks and stones, etc.

How can you criticize a film that hasn't even been released yet?? And once it IS released, are you guys all going to go SEE it before you comment on it?

Have you read up on the intelligent design vs. evolution debate, or are you just speaking from personal bias and ignorance? Most of these comments don't sound like the posters have put any thought into this debate at all.

It seems like many people who accept evolution just respond with "Nope... no... not listening" whenever anyone disagrees with them, instead of listening to what they have to say. Why are people so defensive about this? It's supposed to be science we're debating about, and honest science eventually proves out the truth, so why be afraid of real debate about this?

Lawrence
He is talking about Dragons, we went through this with Daleri in a previous blog. - Good Luck!

Oh, I'm not afraid of a real debate Lori. I actually want to hear the other sides story. But I would like to see their evidence. So far, I've seen very little, and that evidence can't stand up to science. I will listen, it is the other side, I have found, that for the most part says "Nope, no, not listening." There are exceptions to this though, as always.

Lori
Have a look in the recent archives for this column. Most of the names that you see in reply to this blog you will also find in recent related blogs. This is indeed an ongoing, and well researched, argument.

Yea, I figured that Quiet, but I'd still like to see it in the Bible, that way I know what he's talking about, instead of just hearing it. It could be another animal that has been known to exist, and died out only a few thousand years ago. I just don't know, not untill I look it up, and I need to know where exactly in the Bible he's getting this information from.

The point here is that these "academicians" feel that they were "punished" punished for taking positions promoting creationism. In science, you are only "punished" for doing bad science. If someone puts forth credible scientific evidence favoring creationism, then they would be able to get it published. Since no such evidence has yet been found, do these people think they should get published anyway just out of "fairness?" That's not how science works.

Quietman:
I've ordered The Upright Ape. Looking forward to reading it.

Bravo, Raymond. Very well said.